grey at despair.rpglink.com (Steve Lamb) writes regarding procedural macros; > IE, make your own dialect. Make your own dialect, no. Make your own embedded language, yes. But libraries can act as embeded languages too. Without the support of macros, however, the syntax to use them is sometimes painful. "Extending" a language does not imply changing the semantics of the language that is already there -- it means just what the word "extending" means: adding new features to a language that were not there previously. The old features are still there unperturbed, exactly as they were before. The only change to the language is that new syntactic forms have been added. If you don't use the new syntactic form, just as if you don't use new functions that someone defined, you'd never know that they were there. > To me it is deserved. You know why? I'm a out-and-out prick. > Sit down. > Shut up. > Read. > Learn. I know one thing for sure: I know more about programming languages and programming language design than you do or ever will with your attitude. Regarding listening to Alex, I'd listen to him if he weren't also a prick. I'll tell you who I've listened to quite carefully: Guido, who has a lot of good ideas, and the designers of Lisp (eg, Dave Moon, John McArthy, Guy Steele, all of whom I've met personally), who are far smatter than you, me, or Alex will ever be. If you want me to shut up, read, and learn, I recommend that you take your own advice, and read and learn what they have to say. They embody a lot of wisdom that you are willing to dismiss with a wave of your tiny little wand. I have nothing more to say to you. You are a prick and a self-admitted one. Have a nice time with your Perl projects. |>oug
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4